Re: [HACKERS] Hot Standby Feedback should default to on in 9.3+

2012-11-30 Thread Claudio Freire
On Fri, Nov 30, 2012 at 5:46 PM, Heikki Linnakangas hlinnakan...@vmware.com wrote: Think of someone setting up a test server, by setting it up as a standby from the master. Now, when someone holds a transaction open in the test server, you get bloat in the master. Or if you set up a standby

Re: [HACKERS] Hot Standby Feedback should default to on in 9.3+

2012-11-30 Thread Claudio Freire
On Fri, Nov 30, 2012 at 6:06 PM, Kevin Grittner kgri...@mail.com wrote: Without hot standby feedback, reporting queries are impossible. I've experienced it. Cancellations make it impossible to finish any decently complex reporting query. With what setting of max_standby_streaming_delay? I

Re: [HACKERS] Hot Standby Feedback should default to on in 9.3+

2012-11-30 Thread Claudio Freire
On Fri, Nov 30, 2012 at 6:20 PM, Kevin Grittner kgri...@mail.com wrote: Claudio Freire wrote: With what setting of max_standby_streaming_delay? I would rather default that to -1 than default hot_standby_feedback on. That way what you do on the standby only affects the standby. 1d

Re: [HACKERS] Hot Standby Feedback should default to on in 9.3+

2012-11-30 Thread Claudio Freire
On Fri, Nov 30, 2012 at 6:49 PM, Heikki Linnakangas hlinnakan...@vmware.com wrote: I have most certainly managed databases where holding up vacuuming on the source would cripple performance to the point that users would have demanded that any other process causing it must be immediately

Re: [HACKERS] A stab at implementing better password hashing, with mixed results

2012-12-27 Thread Claudio Freire
On Thu, Dec 27, 2012 at 11:46 AM, Peter Bex peter@xs4all.nl wrote: Implementing a more secure challenge-response based algorithm means a change in the client-server protocol. Perhaps something like SCRAM (maybe through SASL) really is the way forward for this, but that seems like quite a

Re: [HACKERS] default SSL compression (was: libpq compression)

2013-01-02 Thread Claudio Freire
On Wed, Jan 2, 2013 at 10:03 AM, Magnus Hagander mag...@hagander.net wrote: Finally we deny MD5 - I have no idea why we do that. Because it's broken, same motivation as in the thread for implementing ZK authentication. Also, I seem to have missed something because the thread subject mentions

Re: [HACKERS] [PERFORM] Slow query: bitmap scan troubles

2013-01-07 Thread Claudio Freire
On Mon, Jan 7, 2013 at 3:27 PM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote: One issue that needs some thought is that the argument for this formula is based entirely on thinking about b-trees. I think it's probably reasonable to apply it to gist, gin, and sp-gist as well, assuming we can get some

Re: [HACKERS] Improve compression speeds in pg_lzcompress.c

2013-01-08 Thread Claudio Freire
On Tue, Jan 8, 2013 at 10:20 AM, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote: On Tue, Jan 8, 2013 at 4:04 AM, Takeshi Yamamuro yamamuro.take...@lab.ntt.co.jp wrote: Apart from my patch, what I care is that the current one might be much slow against I/O. For example, when compressing and writing

Re: [HACKERS] proposal: Set effective_cache_size to greater of .conf value, shared_buffers

2013-01-08 Thread Claudio Freire
On Tue, Jan 8, 2013 at 11:39 AM, Merlin Moncure mmonc...@gmail.com wrote: Reference: http://postgresql.1045698.n5.nabble.com/Simple-join-doesn-t-use-index-td5738689.html This is a pretty common gotcha: user sets shared_buffers but misses the esoteric but important effective_cache_size. ISTM

Re: [HACKERS] proposal: Set effective_cache_size to greater of .conf value, shared_buffers

2013-01-09 Thread Claudio Freire
On Wed, Jan 9, 2013 at 3:39 PM, Josh Berkus j...@agliodbs.com wrote: It seems to me that pgfincore has the smarts we need to know about that, and that Cédric has code and refenrences for making it work on all platforms we care about (linux, bsd, windows for starters). Well, fincore is

Re: [HACKERS] [PATCH] COPY .. COMPRESSED

2013-01-14 Thread Claudio Freire
On Mon, Jan 14, 2013 at 1:01 PM, Stephen Frost sfr...@snowman.net wrote: I do like the idea of a generalized answer which just runs a user-provided command on the server but that's always going to require superuser privileges. Unless it's one of a set of superuser-authorized compression tools.

Re: [HACKERS] [PATCH] COPY .. COMPRESSED

2013-01-15 Thread Claudio Freire
On Mon, Jan 14, 2013 at 11:33 PM, Stephen Frost sfr...@snowman.net wrote: Now, protocol-level on-the-wire compression is another option, but there's quite a few drawbacks to that and quite a bit of work involved. Having support for COPY-based compression could be an answer for many cases

Re: [HACKERS] [PATCH] COPY .. COMPRESSED

2013-01-15 Thread Claudio Freire
On Tue, Jan 15, 2013 at 1:08 PM, Stephen Frost sfr...@snowman.net wrote: Where it does work well is when you move into a bulk-data mode (ala COPY) and can compress relatively large amounts of data into a smaller number of full-size packets to be sent. Well... exactly. COPY is one case, big

Re: [HACKERS] Parallel query execution

2013-01-15 Thread Claudio Freire
On Tue, Jan 15, 2013 at 8:19 PM, Bruce Momjian br...@momjian.us wrote: Given our row-based storage architecture, I can't imagine we'd do anything other than take a row-based approach to this.. I would think we'd do two things: parallelize based on partitioning, and parallelize seqscan's

Re: [HACKERS] [PATCH] COPY .. COMPRESSED

2013-01-15 Thread Claudio Freire
On Tue, Jan 15, 2013 at 7:46 PM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote: Compressing every small packet seems like it'd be overkill and might surprise people by actually reducing performance in the case of lots of small requests. Yeah, proper selection and integration of a compression method would

Re: [HACKERS] Parallel query execution

2013-01-15 Thread Claudio Freire
On Wed, Jan 16, 2013 at 12:13 AM, Stephen Frost sfr...@snowman.net wrote: * Claudio Freire (klaussfre...@gmail.com) wrote: On Tue, Jan 15, 2013 at 8:19 PM, Bruce Momjian br...@momjian.us wrote: The 1GB idea is interesting. I found in pg_upgrade that file copy would just overwhelm the I/O

Re: [HACKERS] Parallel query execution

2013-01-15 Thread Claudio Freire
On Wed, Jan 16, 2013 at 12:55 AM, Stephen Frost sfr...@snowman.net wrote: If memory serves me correctly (and it does, I suffered it a lot), the performance hit is quite considerable. Enough to make it a lot worse rather than not as good. I feel like we must not be communicating very well.

Re: [HACKERS] Parallel query execution

2013-01-16 Thread Claudio Freire
On Wed, Jan 16, 2013 at 10:33 AM, Stephen Frost sfr...@snowman.net wrote: * Claudio Freire (klaussfre...@gmail.com) wrote: Well, there's the fault in your logic. It won't be as linear. I really don't see how this has become so difficult to communicate. It doesn't have to be linear. We're

Re: [HACKERS] Parallel query execution

2013-01-16 Thread Claudio Freire
On Wed, Jan 16, 2013 at 10:04 PM, Jeff Janes jeff.ja...@gmail.com wrote: Hmm... How about being aware of multiple spindles - so if the requested data covers multiple spindles, then data could be extracted in parallel. This may, or may not, involve multiple I/O channels?

Re: [HACKERS] [PATCH] COPY .. COMPRESSED

2013-01-16 Thread Claudio Freire
On Wed, Jan 16, 2013 at 8:19 PM, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote: On Tue, Jan 15, 2013 at 4:50 PM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote: I find the argument that this supports compression-over-the-wire to be quite weak, because COPY is only one form of bulk data transfer, and one that a

Re: [HACKERS] Parallel query execution

2013-01-16 Thread Claudio Freire
On Wed, Jan 16, 2013 at 11:44 PM, Bruce Momjian br...@momjian.us wrote: On Wed, Jan 16, 2013 at 05:04:05PM -0800, Jeff Janes wrote: On Tuesday, January 15, 2013, Stephen Frost wrote: * Gavin Flower (gavinflo...@archidevsys.co.nz) wrote: How about being aware of multiple spindles - so

Re: [HACKERS] [PATCH 1/3] Fix x + y x overflow checks

2013-01-24 Thread Claudio Freire
On Thu, Jan 24, 2013 at 6:36 AM, Xi Wang xi.w...@gmail.com wrote: icc optimizes away the overflow check x + y x (y 0), because signed integer overflow is undefined behavior in C. Instead, use a safe precondition test x INT_MAX - y. I should mention gcc 4.7 does the same, and it emits a

Re: [HACKERS] [RFC] CREATE QUEUE (log-only table) for londiste/pgQ ccompatibility

2012-10-18 Thread Claudio Freire
On Thu, Oct 18, 2012 at 2:33 PM, Josh Berkus j...@agliodbs.com wrote: I should also add that this is an switchable sync/asynchronous transactional queue, whereas LISTEN/NOTIFY is a synchronous transactional queue. Thanks for explaining. New here, I missed half the conversation, but since

[HACKERS] Prefetch index pages for B-Tree index scans

2012-10-18 Thread Claudio Freire
I've noticed, doing some reporting queries once, that index scans fail to saturate server resources on compute-intensive queries. Problem is, just after fetching a page, postgres starts computing stuff before fetching the next. This results in I/O - compute - I/O - compute alternation that

Re: [HACKERS] [PATCH] Prefetch index pages for B-Tree index scans

2012-10-18 Thread Claudio Freire
On Thu, Oct 18, 2012 at 5:30 PM, Claudio Freire klaussfre...@gmail.com wrote: Backward: QUERY PLAN

Re: [HACKERS] [PATCH] Support for Array ELEMENT Foreign Keys

2012-10-19 Thread Claudio Freire
On Fri, Oct 19, 2012 at 5:48 PM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote: It looks like we could support CREATE TABLE t1 (c int[] REFERENCES BY ELEMENT t2); but (1) this doesn't seem terribly intelligible to me, and (2) I don't see how we modify that if we want to provide

Re: [HACKERS] [PATCH] Prefetch index pages for B-Tree index scans

2012-10-22 Thread Claudio Freire
On Thu, Oct 18, 2012 at 7:42 PM, Claudio Freire klaussfre...@gmail.com wrote: Fun. That didn't take long. With the attached anti-sequential scan patch, and effective_io_concurrency=8: QUERY PLAN

Re: [HACKERS] [PATCH] Prefetch index pages for B-Tree index scans

2012-10-23 Thread Claudio Freire
On Tue, Oct 23, 2012 at 9:44 AM, John Lumby johnlu...@hotmail.com wrote: From: Claudio Freire klaussfre...@gmail.com I hope I'm not talking to myself. Indeed not. I also looked into prefetching for pure index scans for b-trees (and extension to use async io). http

Re: [HACKERS] Logical to physical page mapping

2012-10-27 Thread Claudio Freire
On Sat, Oct 27, 2012 at 3:41 PM, Heikki Linnakangas hlinnakan...@vmware.com wrote: I think you're just moving the atomic-write problem from the data pages to wherever you keep these pointers. If the pointers are stored as simple 4-byte integers, you probably could assume that they're

Re: [HACKERS] [PATCH] Prefetch index pages for B-Tree index scans

2012-10-29 Thread Claudio Freire
On Tue, Oct 23, 2012 at 10:54 AM, Claudio Freire klaussfre...@gmail.com wrote: Indeed not. I also looked into prefetching for pure index scans for b-trees (and extension to use async io). http://archives.postgresql.org/message-id/BLU0-SMTP31709961D846CCF4F5EB4C2A3930%40phx.gbl Yes, I've

Re: [HACKERS] [PATCH] Prefetch index pages for B-Tree index scans

2012-10-29 Thread Claudio Freire
On Mon, Oct 29, 2012 at 7:07 PM, Cédric Villemain ced...@2ndquadrant.com wrote: But it also looks forgotten. Bringing it back to life would mean building the latest kernel with that patch included, replicating the benchmarks I ran here, sans pg patch, but with patched kernel, and reporting the

Re: [HACKERS] [PATCH] Prefetch index pages for B-Tree index scans

2012-11-01 Thread Claudio Freire
On Thu, Nov 1, 2012 at 1:37 PM, John Lumby johnlu...@hotmail.com wrote: Claudio wrote : Oops - forgot to effectively attach the patch. I've read through your patch and the earlier posts by you and Cédric. This is very interesting. You chose to prefetch index btree (key-ptr) pages

Re: [HACKERS] [PATCH] Prefetch index pages for B-Tree index scans

2012-11-01 Thread Claudio Freire
On Thu, Nov 1, 2012 at 2:00 PM, Andres Freund and...@2ndquadrant.com wrote: I agree. I'm a bit hesitant to subscribe to yet another mailing list FYI you can send messages to linux-kernel without subscribing (there's no moderation either). Subscribing to linux-kernel is like drinking from a

Re: [HACKERS] [PATCH] Prefetch index pages for B-Tree index scans

2012-11-01 Thread Claudio Freire
On Thu, Nov 1, 2012 at 10:59 PM, Greg Smith g...@2ndquadrant.com wrote: On 11/1/12 6:13 PM, Claudio Freire wrote: posix_fadvise what's the trouble there, but the fact that the kernel stops doing read-ahead when a call to posix_fadvise comes. I noticed the performance hit, and checked

Re: [HACKERS] libpq

2012-11-06 Thread Claudio Freire
On Tue, Nov 6, 2012 at 6:59 PM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote: If, instead, you are keen on getting the source code for libpq in a separate tarball, I'd seriously question why that would be expected to be valuable. On most systems, these days, it doesn't take terribly much time or space

Re: [HACKERS] libpq

2012-11-06 Thread Claudio Freire
On Tue, Nov 6, 2012 at 7:25 PM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote: Claudio Freire klaussfre...@gmail.com writes: Maybe anl libs / install-libs makefile target? I've already faced the complicated procedure one has to go through to build and install only libpq built from source

Re: [HACKERS] [PERFORM] pg_dump and thousands of schemas

2012-05-31 Thread Claudio Freire
On Thu, May 31, 2012 at 11:17 AM, Robert Klemme shortcut...@googlemail.com wrote: OK, my fault was to assume you wanted to measure only your part, while apparently you meant overall savings.  But Tom had asked for separate measurements if I understood him correctly.  Also, that measurement of

Re: [HACKERS] [PERFORM] pg_dump and thousands of schemas

2012-05-31 Thread Claudio Freire
On Thu, May 31, 2012 at 11:50 AM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote: The performance patches we applied to pg_dump over the past couple weeks were meant to relieve pain in situations where the big server-side lossage wasn't the dominant factor in runtime (ie, partial dumps). But this one is

Re: [HACKERS] [PERFORM] pg_dump and thousands of schemas

2012-05-31 Thread Claudio Freire
On Thu, May 31, 2012 at 12:25 PM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote: No, Tatsuo's patch attacks a phase dominated by latency in some setups. No, it does not.  The reason it's a win is that it avoids the O(N^2) behavior in the server.  Whether the bandwidth savings is worth worrying about

Re: unified vs context diffs (was Re: [HACKERS] Strange Windows problem, lock_timeout test request)

2013-02-24 Thread Claudio Freire
On Sun, Feb 24, 2013 at 11:08 AM, Stephen Frost sfr...@snowman.net wrote: * Heikki Linnakangas (hlinnakan...@vmware.com) wrote: So if you want to be kind to readers, look at the patch and choose the format depending on which one makes it look better. But there's no need to make a point of it

Re: [HACKERS] Spin Lock sleep resolution

2013-04-01 Thread Claudio Freire
On Tue, Apr 2, 2013 at 1:24 AM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote: Jeff Janes jeff.ja...@gmail.com writes: The problem is that the state is maintained only to an integer number of milliseconds starting at 1, so it can take a number of attempts for the random increment to jump from 1 to 2, and

Re: [HACKERS] Multi-pass planner

2013-04-19 Thread Claudio Freire
On Fri, Apr 19, 2013 at 6:19 PM, Jeff Janes jeff.ja...@gmail.com wrote: On Wed, Apr 3, 2013 at 6:40 PM, Greg Stark st...@mit.edu wrote: On Fri, Aug 21, 2009 at 6:54 PM, decibel deci...@decibel.org wrote: Would it? Risk seems like it would just be something along the lines of the high-end of

Re: [HACKERS] Multi-pass planner

2013-04-19 Thread Claudio Freire
On Fri, Apr 19, 2013 at 7:43 PM, Jeff Janes jeff.ja...@gmail.com wrote: On Fri, Apr 19, 2013 at 2:24 PM, Claudio Freire klaussfre...@gmail.com wrote: Especially if there's some locality of occurrence, since analyze samples pages, not rows. But it doesn't take all rows in each sampled page

Re: [HACKERS] Allowing parallel pg_restore from pipe

2013-04-24 Thread Claudio Freire
On Wed, Apr 24, 2013 at 6:47 PM, Joachim Wieland j...@mcknight.de wrote: On Wed, Apr 24, 2013 at 4:05 PM, Stefan Kaltenbrunner ste...@kaltenbrunner.cc wrote: What might make sense is something like pg_dump_restore which would have no intermediate storage at all, just pump the data etc from

Re: [HACKERS] Parallel Sort

2013-05-14 Thread Claudio Freire
On Tue, May 14, 2013 at 11:50 AM, Noah Misch n...@leadboat.com wrote: On Mon, May 13, 2013 at 09:52:43PM +0200, Kohei KaiGai wrote: 2013/5/13 Noah Misch n...@leadboat.com The choice of whether to parallelize can probably be made a manner similar to the choice to do an external sort: the

Re: [HACKERS] Parallel Sort

2013-05-15 Thread Claudio Freire
On Wed, May 15, 2013 at 3:04 PM, Noah Misch n...@leadboat.com wrote: On Tue, May 14, 2013 at 12:15:24PM -0300, Claudio Freire wrote: You know what would be a low-hanging fruit that I've been thinking would benefit many of my own queries? Parallel sequential scan nodes. Even if there's no real

Re: [HACKERS] counting algorithm for incremental matview maintenance

2013-05-17 Thread Claudio Freire
On Fri, May 17, 2013 at 4:25 PM, Kevin Grittner kgri...@ymail.com wrote: (3) The count algorithm must be implemented in a way that understands MVCC internals: Reading the base tables must be done using a technique that reads all rows (i.e., also the ones not visible to the current

Re: [HACKERS] Cost limited statements RFC

2013-05-23 Thread Claudio Freire
On Thu, May 23, 2013 at 8:27 PM, Greg Smith g...@2ndquadrant.com wrote: The main unintended consequences issue I've found so far is when a cost delayed statement holds a heavy lock. Autovacuum has some protection against letting processes with an exclusive lock on a table go to sleep. It

Re: [HACKERS] Cost limited statements RFC

2013-05-23 Thread Claudio Freire
On Thu, May 23, 2013 at 8:46 PM, Greg Smith g...@2ndquadrant.com wrote: On 5/23/13 7:34 PM, Claudio Freire wrote: Why not make the delay conditional on the amount of concurrency, kinda like the commit_delay? Although in this case, it should only count unwaiting connections. The test run

Re: [HACKERS] adding import in pl/python function

2013-05-24 Thread Claudio Freire
On Fri, May 24, 2013 at 4:10 PM, Szymon Guz mabew...@gmail.com wrote: I'm thinking about something else. We could convert it into Decimal (http://docs.python.org/2/library/decimal.html) class in Python. Unfortunately this class requires import like `from decimal import Decimal` from a

Re: [HACKERS] adding import in pl/python function

2013-05-24 Thread Claudio Freire
On Fri, May 24, 2013 at 4:22 PM, Szymon Guz mabew...@gmail.com wrote: Hm... maybe you're right. I think I don't understand fully how the procedures are executed, and I need to read more to get it. Well, it's easy. Instead of PLyFloat_FromNumeric[0], you can make a PLyDecimal_FromNumeric.

Re: [HACKERS] adding import in pl/python function

2013-05-27 Thread Claudio Freire
On Mon, May 27, 2013 at 8:13 PM, Peter Eisentraut pete...@gmx.net wrote: On Fri, 2013-05-24 at 16:46 -0300, Claudio Freire wrote: Well, it's easy. Instead of PLyFloat_FromNumeric[0], you can make a PLyDecimal_FromNumeric. Please send a patch. This would be a welcome addition. I can write

Re: [HACKERS] Hard limit on WAL space used (because PANIC sucks)

2013-06-12 Thread Claudio Freire
On Wed, Jun 12, 2013 at 11:55 AM, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote: I hope PostgreSQL will provide a reliable archiving facility that is ready to use. +1. I think we should have a way to set an archive DIRECTORY, rather than an archive command. And if you set it, then PostgreSQL

Re: [HACKERS] Hard limit on WAL space used (because PANIC sucks)

2013-06-12 Thread Claudio Freire
On Wed, Jun 12, 2013 at 6:03 PM, Joshua D. Drake j...@commandprompt.com wrote: Right now you have to be a rocket scientist no matter what configuration you're running. This is quite a bit overblown. Assuming your needs are simple. Archiving is at it is now, a relatively simple process to

Re: [HACKERS] Implementing incremental backup

2013-06-19 Thread Claudio Freire
On Wed, Jun 19, 2013 at 7:13 AM, Tatsuo Ishii is...@postgresql.org wrote: For now, my idea is pretty vague. - Record info about modified blocks. We don't need to remember the whole history of a block if the block was modified multiple times. We just remember that the block was modified

Re: [HACKERS] Implementing incremental backup

2013-06-19 Thread Claudio Freire
On Wed, Jun 19, 2013 at 3:54 PM, Jim Nasby j...@nasby.net wrote: On 6/19/13 11:02 AM, Claudio Freire wrote: On Wed, Jun 19, 2013 at 7:13 AM, Tatsuo Ishii is...@postgresql.org wrote: For now, my idea is pretty vague. - Record info about modified blocks. We don't need to remember

Re: [HACKERS] Implementing incremental backup

2013-06-19 Thread Claudio Freire
On Wed, Jun 19, 2013 at 6:20 PM, Stephen Frost sfr...@snowman.net wrote: * Claudio Freire (klaussfre...@gmail.com) wrote: I don't see how this is better than snapshotting at the filesystem level. I have no experience with TB scale databases (I've been limited to only hundreds of GB), but from

Re: [HACKERS] Implementing incremental backup

2013-06-19 Thread Claudio Freire
On Wed, Jun 19, 2013 at 7:18 PM, Alvaro Herrera alvhe...@2ndquadrant.com wrote: If you have the two technologies, you could teach them to work in conjunction: you set up WAL replication, and tell the WAL compressor to prune updates for high-update tables (avoid useless traffic), then use

Re: [HACKERS] Implementing incremental backup

2013-06-19 Thread Claudio Freire
On Wed, Jun 19, 2013 at 7:39 PM, Tatsuo Ishii is...@postgresql.org wrote: I'm thinking of implementing an incremental backup tool for PostgreSQL. The use case for the tool would be taking a backup of huge database. For that size of database, pg_dump is too slow, even WAL archive is too

Re: [HACKERS] Implementing incremental backup

2013-06-19 Thread Claudio Freire
On Wed, Jun 19, 2013 at 8:40 PM, Tatsuo Ishii is...@postgresql.org wrote: On Wed, Jun 19, 2013 at 6:20 PM, Stephen Frost sfr...@snowman.net wrote: * Claudio Freire (klaussfre...@gmail.com) wrote: I don't see how this is better than snapshotting at the filesystem level. I have no experience

Re: [HACKERS] [9.4 CF 1] The Commitfest Slacker List

2013-06-24 Thread Claudio Freire
On Mon, Jun 24, 2013 at 2:22 PM, Josh Berkus j...@agliodbs.com wrote: I have previously proposed that all of the reviewers of a given PostgreSQL release be honored in the release notes as a positive incentive, and was denied on this from doing so. Not coincidentally, we don't seem to have any

Re: [HACKERS] [9.4 CF 1] The Commitfest Slacker List

2013-06-24 Thread Claudio Freire
On Mon, Jun 24, 2013 at 2:41 PM, Andres Freund and...@2ndquadrant.com wrote: I don't like idea of sending gifts. I do like the idea of public thanks. We should put full recognition in the release notes for someone who reviews a patch. If they didn't review the patch, the person that wrote the

Re: [HACKERS] C++ compiler

2013-06-24 Thread Claudio Freire
On Mon, Jun 24, 2013 at 9:19 PM, Joshua D. Drake j...@commandprompt.com wrote: I think the big question is whether you can _control_ what C++ features are used, or whether you are perpetually instructing users what C++ features not to use. How is that different than us having to do the same

Re: [HACKERS] Hash partitioning.

2013-06-25 Thread Claudio Freire
On Tue, Jun 25, 2013 at 12:55 PM, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote: Let me back up a minute. You told the OP that he could make hash partitioning by writing his own constraint and trigger functions. I think that won't work. But I'm happy to be proven wrong. Do you have an example

Re: [HACKERS] Kudos for Reviewers -- straw poll

2013-06-25 Thread Claudio Freire
On Tue, Jun 25, 2013 at 2:17 PM, Josh Berkus j...@agliodbs.com wrote: How should reviewers get credited in the release notes? c) on the patch they reviewed, for each patch This not only makes sense, it also lets people reading release notes know there's been a review, and how thorough it was. I

Re: [HACKERS] pluggable compression support

2013-06-25 Thread Claudio Freire
On Tue, Jun 25, 2013 at 4:15 PM, Andres Freund and...@2ndquadrant.com wrote: However, can you tell me what exactly you are concerned about? lz4 is under the BSD license, and released by Google. Snappy is released/copyrighted by google. lz4 by Yann Collet. Both are under BSD licenses (3 and 2

Re: [HACKERS] Hash partitioning.

2013-06-25 Thread<